SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Rande Is . . . HOME -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Rande Is who wrote (57103)8/4/2005 12:11:45 PM
From: paret  Respond to of 57584
 
Hollywood hails digital film deal ~~ Films to be delivered digitally...Internet in play
BBC ^ | Thursday, 28 July 2005
renewamerica.us

The cost of digital equipment may be passed to fans at box offices

The digital cinema revolution has moved a step closer after Hollywood studios reached a landmark deal that will consign reels of film to history.

Major studios have agreed how digital projectors should work, meaning approved technology can now be manufactured and installed.

With digital projectors, films are screened and distributed by computer.

Oscars president Frank Pierson said it was "an important milestone in the advancement" of motion pictures.

Studios have spent the last three years working on the technology and have now settled on specifications they say are good enough for all types of movies.

It's a giant leap forward for those of us who create movies
George Lucas Director

Some cinemas have already installed digital projectors, but the deal means an industry standard can be rolled out around the world.

But it is not clear whether the studios or cinema chains will foot the bill for the new equipment - and whether ticket prices will go up as a result.

It has been reported that each projector will cost $60,000-$100,000 (£34,000-£57,000).

Industry group Digital Cinema Initiatives (DCI) said the technology will become "increasingly affordable, to the point where that stumbling block should no longer be of consequence".

The cost of distributing each film will be cut by 75% because studios can send their films to cinemas by satellite, fibre optic cable or disc, instead of truck.


This now opens the door for the roll-out of digital cinema, which will revolutionise the cinematic experience for moviegoers

James Cameron
Director

Mr Pierson, president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, which runs the Oscars, said the deal would equip the industry for the future.

"In its first hundred years, our art form made a forceful universal impression, at least partly because worldwide standards for projecting film were adopted early on," he said.

"The next hundred years are likely to be similarly affected by DCI's work in defining how digital motion pictures will be presented to world audiences."

Star Wars creator George Lucas hailed the deal as "a giant leap forward".


Hallelujah - it's about time
Robert Zemeckis
Director


"We have been advocates of digital cinema for nearly a decade, and this is a day we have long hoped would come," he said.

"Digital cinema will increasingly become the standard and will change the way movies are made, seen and experienced around the world."

Titanic director James Cameron said digital cinema would "revolutionise the cinematic experience for moviegoers around the world".

Forrest Gump director Robert Zemeckis added: "Hallelujah - it's about time."

DCI's Walt Ordway said: "We now have a unified specification that will allow manufacturers to create products that will be employable at movie theatres throughout the country and, it is hoped, throughout the world."



To: Rande Is who wrote (57103)8/7/2005 1:08:53 AM
From: paret  Respond to of 57584
 
Harvard University Scam Exposed by Feds--ordered to pay back over $20 million

by Jim Kouri, CPP

Jim Kouri is Vice President of the
National Association of Chiefs of Police
Saturday, August 06, 2005
mensnewsdaily.com

Harvard University is ordered to pay back over $20 million
to the US government as part of a settlement deal
resulting from a multi-million dollar scam.
Two Harvard
employees are also ordered make restitution bringing the
total settlement to $31 million.

Two senior Harvard University advisors, Andre Shleifer
and Jonathan Hay were paid under a US Agency for
International Development grant to lead a project
to provide advice to the nascent Russian economy on
privatization following the fall of communism and
the creation of fair and open markets and the rule
of law. The US Attorney's Office alleged that instead,
Shleifer and Hay used their positions and substantial
influence over Russian officials at this pivotal time
in Russian history to advance their own and their spouses'
private financial interests.

Under a settlement, the total repayments will exceed
$31 million by Harvard University and it's two advisors.
Specifically the settlement calls for Harvard to pay $26.5
million; Shleifer to pay $2 million; and Hay to pay between
$1 million and $2 million. Also factored into the
settlement amount total is $1.5 million already paid to
the United States by FFIA, formerly known as Farallon
Fixed Income Associates, LP, a company owned by
Shleifer's wife, Nancy Zimmerman. In addition, Shleifer
and Hay have agreed to be debarred by USAID.

The defendants were entrusted with the important task
of assisting in the creation of a post-communist Russian
open market economy and instead took the
opportunity to enrich themselves. Such conflict of
interest activities only serve to undermine important
development programs, according to officials.
As evidenced by the hard fought five-year litigation
of this matter, the US Attorney's Office is committed to
protecting federal funding from misuse and ensuring the
adherence to the requirements of government contracts.

"Improper use of federal grant programs for the purpose
of self-enrichment will not be tolerated," said Peter D.
Keisler, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division.
"[This] settlement demonstrates our commitment to
fighting fraud and abuse against the United States wherever
we find it."

The United States' case provided extensive evidence that,
despite the clear terms of the agreements, Shleifer and
Hay were making prohibited investments in Russia in the
areas in which they were providing advice. The
United States government further demonstrated that
Shleifer and Hay were self-dealing by sing their positions,
as well as USAID-funded resources, to advance their own
personal business interests and investments and those of
their wives and friends.

Their self-dealing activities included using their
influence over the Russian Securities Commission to
which they were key advisors to secure for
themselves and their wives the first ever launched
and licensed mutual fund in Russia. The terms of the
USAID grant strictly prohibited any investments in
Russia by American advisors funded under the grant.

The Civil Complaint alleged, and the Court found, that
while they were being paid by USAID, the two Harvard employees
engaged in the following prohibited investments and businesses
in Russia:

* Shleifer and his wife Zimmerman invested and reinvested $200,000
through Renova-Invest, a United States/Russian investment entity, in
various Russian companies and in Russian government debt;

* Shleifer, Zimmerman and Hay purchased several hundred thousand
dollars worth of shares in Russian oil companies, but placed the
ownership of those shares in the name of Shleifer's father-in-law;
and

* Hay and Shleifer participated in the launching and/or financing of:
Russia's first licensed mutual fund, which was started by
Elizabeth Hebert, Hay's then girlfriend, now wife; and Russia's
first licensed mutual fund depository, the First Russian Specialized
Depository, which was started by Hebert's business partner
and provided support services to the mutual fund.

The United States alleged and demonstrated that Shleifer,
Hay and Harvard University never disclosed any of these
prohibited personal business activities and/or investments
to USAID.

The Civil Complaint alleged that as a result of the
misconduct of the defendants, USAID funds expended on the
Project were diverted, abused and wasted. As a result
of the defendants' misconduct, USAID suspended and
ultimately terminated the HARVARD project in Russia.

"Conflicts of interest and corruption attack at the core
of what USAID strives to achieve for developing nations
throughout the world and are certainly two of the most
serious threats to the success of USAID sponsored
programs," stated Acting USAID Inspector General Bruce
Crandlemire.

"Eight years of intensive investigation and tireless
litigation on this case represents a firm and dogged
commitment by the offices charged with the
protection of federal dollars to the principle that
power and influence does not provide a free pass to
those who would attempt to exploit their positions
of public trust for private gain."

After extensive summary judgment briefings, US District
Judge Douglas P. Woodlock, in a one hundred-page opinion,
found liability against Shelifer and
Hay under the False Claims Act, and against Harvard
University for breach of contract
with USAID. At a federal civil trial, a jury found
additional liability against Shleifer for his violation of
the conflict of interest policy in USAID's contracts
with Harvard.

Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police. He's former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed "Crack City" by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He's also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. He writes for many police and crime magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer, Campus Law Enforcement Journal, and others, and he's a columnist for TheConservativeVoice.Com. He's appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc. His book Assume The Position is available at Amazon.Com, Booksamillion.com, and can be ordered at local bookstores. Kouri holds a bachelor of science in criminal justice and master of arts in public administration and he's a board certified protection professional.



To: Rande Is who wrote (57103)8/7/2005 8:12:39 PM
From: bradfenton  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 57584
 
Rande,
Here we are heading into the 2nd week of August.

Wanted to check in and see if you are out of the " dear in the headlights" look yet?

I too am mostly in cash (80%), looking at the right area to deploy.

Do you see this 1930-1970 nas area as a probable low for the remainder of the year?



To: Rande Is who wrote (57103)8/14/2005 9:28:02 PM
From: paret  Respond to of 57584
 
Dollar rebound delivers costly shock to investors-including Warren Buffett
Financial Times ^
By Steve Johnson in London Sun | August 14,2005

Pension funds, trend-following hedge funds and private investors are all believed to have been hit this year because of the US dollar's unexpected strength. ADVERTISEMENT

But more nimble investors, including many hedge funds, are now believed to have recouped most of their losses.

The dollar fell by 38.7 per cent against the euro in the three years to 2004 as worries over the twin US external and budget deficits intensified. The sell-off was particularly acute in last year's fourth quarter, leading many in the markets to anticipate more losses this year and thus build big short-dollar positions.

But the dollar has proved robust, rallying from $1.356 against the euro to $1.188 in July, before slipping back recently to $1.243.

"The whole world expected the dollar to go down [in January], but there was no one left to sell the dollar," said James Binny, director of FX analytics and risk advisory at ABN Amro.

Berkshire Hathaway, the investment group run by Warren Buffett, has been a high-profile victim of the dollar's fightback.

Berkshire's $21.5bn of short-dollar forward contracts produced a pre-tax loss of $926m in the first half of 2005, eating into the $2bn gains made from shorting the dollar in the previous three years. Hedge funds also made sharp initial losses. BNP Paribas's FX Funds Index, which tracks the performance of hedge funds and commodity trading advisers, suggests the sector lost 4.4 per cent in January.

However, data from the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission indicates that short-term speculators swung to being long on dollars by the spring, although these positions are now being liquidated. Consequently, BNP's index indicates that by June hedge funds had cut year-to-date losses to 1.7 per cent.

Yet many funds still face significant losses. Dummy portfolios run by ABN's Mr Binny, designed to imitate popular hedge fund trading styles, suggest that trend-following hedge funds typically lost 7.4 per cent in the year to July, while short volatility funds which suffer when currencies break out of their trading ranges lost 6.4 per cent. Yield and value-seeking funds are likely to have made small gains.

Avinash Persaud has been another victim, with the currency hedge fund he managed for Global Asset Management closing in April after losses. He thinks this year's losers were "clever" investors who anticipated fresh dollar weakness, with "dumb" investors largely "non-profit maximisers" who stick with the dollar through thick and thin making the gains.



To: Rande Is who wrote (57103)8/16/2005 4:50:19 AM
From: paret  Respond to of 57584
 
Dow Jones soars on stake sale talk
The Times (U.K.) ^ | August 16, 2005 | Nic Hopkins

SHARES in Dow Jones, the publisher of The Wall Street Journal, soared yesterday as it emerged that some members of the Bancroft family may be pushing to sell their controlling stake.

The shares rose almost 10 per cent as Wall Street investors speculated that the younger heirs of Clarence Barron, who bought The Wall Street Journal in 1902, are looking to crystalise their fortune and ensure that it remains intact for future generations.

The family is said to be split over what to do with the stake in Dow Jones, which has halved in value during the past decade. Meanwhile, some independent shareholders are echoing their call for the company to be sold.

Some observers believe that the Bancrofts, who receive a $25 million (£14 million) dividend from Dow Jones every year, could sell their stake for as much as double the current value of about $950 million.

Mark Boyar, of Boyar Asset Management, a shareholder that has been critical of management, said: “The best thing for the newspaper would be to sell to a large newspaper publisher, who could create significant cost synergies.”

The Bancrofts control Dow Jones through their ownership of super-voting Class B shares that carry ten votes apiece, but they have been selling them gradually.

Dow Jones shareholders recently allowed the family to reduce the level of stock ownership that they need to maintain control of the company from 12 million to 7.5 million. If they fall below that level, the Class B shares convert to ordinary stock.

Family members own about 15.6 million Class B shares, giving them about 60 per cent of the vote, plus another 9.5 million shares of common stock.

Speculation that the Bancrofts are looking to sell has been increased by the waning fortunes of American newspaper stocks this year, with investors concerned over their ability to compete with the internet and cable television. Mr Boyar, who controls total investments worth more than $600 million, has written to the Dow Jones board urging it to consider a sale or shake-up of the company. He said that there would be “a long line” of potential buyers, including other media groups and private-equity investors.

“Trophy assets like this don’t come up for sale too often. If they only put up The Wall Street Journal for sale, there would be a feeding frenzy,” Mr Boyar said.

Even in a flat market, investors have long been unhappy with the performance of Dow Jones, whose assets also include the Barron’s weekly financial magazine and the Dow Jones wire service. “It’s been the worst-performing newspaper stock over the past 15 years,” Mr Boyar said.

In recent years Dow Jones has been hit harder than other newspaper companies because of its reliance on financial and technology advertising, which slumped during the dot-com collapse.

Other investors blame the underperformance of the shares on the strategy of Peter Kann, the chief executive. They believe that Mr Kann may have overpaid for MarketWatch, an online financial information service, in January. They also question his plan to launch a Saturday edition of The Wall Street Journal next month, a move that they fear will cannibalise weekday sales and reduce demand for Barron’s.

Dow Jones refused to comment, and representatives of the Bancroft family did not return phone calls.

The company was started in 1882 as a financial news service in the basement of the New York Stock Exchange by Charles Dow and Edward Jones. Its publications are considered to be the journals of record for the American financial establishment.

PAPER TRAIL

Market value: $3.1bn

Sales (2004): $1.7bn

Profits (2004): $99.5m

Assets Include: The Wall Street Journal, including European and Asian editions and WSJ.com; Barron’s; Dow Jones Newswires; MarketWatch; Ottaway Newspapers, comprising 15 daily and 18 weekly newspapers

Strategic alliances: Factiva, CNBC Asia, CNBC Europe, SmartMoney and STOXX



To: Rande Is who wrote (57103)8/29/2005 1:43:08 PM
From: paret  Respond to of 57584
 
Banned airlines lists published
BBC News ^ | August 29, 2005

France and Belgium have published separate blacklists of airlines banned from their territory on safety grounds.

The lists were posted on the websites of the French civil aviation authority (DGAC) and Belgium's Transport Ministry on Monday.

Switzerland has also promised to provide its own list on Thursday.

The moves follow a plane crash in Venezuela on 16 August, in which 152 French passengers died on their way home to the island of Martinique.

Meanwhile on Saturday, at a meeting of the European Civil Aviation Conference in Bucharest, experts called for a Europe-wide definition of common criteria for blacklists.

The European Commission reached a deal in February to allow the creation of EU-wide blacklists of unsafe airlines by the end of the year.

But correspondents say it is unclear whether agreement on the blacklists is possible, with Italy calling for just a list of safe companies.

Charter transparency

The two countries' lists were mutually exclusive, though several names of airlines coincided with those on a list published in the UK.

AIRLINE BLACKLISTS
French list
Air Koryo, North Korea
Air Saint-Thomas, US Virgin Islands
International Air Service, Liberia
Air Mozambique (LAM), including its subsidiary Transairways
Phuket Airlines, Thailand
Belgian list
Africa Lines, Central African Republic
Air Memphis, Egypt
Air Van Airlines, Armenia
Central Air Express, Democratic Republic of Congo
ICTTPW, Libya
International Air Tours Ltd., Nigeria
Johnsons Air Ltd., Ghana
Silverback Cargo Freighters, Rwanda
South Airlines, Ukraine

In addition to the list of banned airlines, the DGAC site also published a list of authorised companies including charter airlines.

French Transport Minister Dominique Perben said last week that by the end of the year passengers taking charter or tour group flights would have the right to be told which company was operating the flight.

Checks on aircraft making stopovers at French airports will also be stepped up.

Switzerland has already revealed the names of some banned airlines, but said it would publish a full list on 1 September.

Passenger revolt

On Wednesday night, 235 passengers of a Tunisian charter plane flying from Paris to the Tunisian island of Djerba refused to re-board a plane which was forced to return to Orly airport for checks shortly after take-off.

That incident came a week after the Venezuela crash, which involved a Colombian-owned plane.

August 2005 has been marked by a string of major plane disasters.

In less then two weeks, three planes have crashed in Greece, Venezuela and Peru - all three of them operated by minor airlines.

More than 300 people have lost their lives in the three accidents.

The issue of blacklisting came to prominence when 148 people - most of them French - died in January 2004 in a crash involving an airline which had been banned from Swiss airspace, a fact which the passengers had no way of knowing.

Story from BBC NEWS:
news.bbc.co.uk